Background
Summary of Council decision:
Four issues were investigated, of which one was Upheld and three were Not Upheld.
Ad description
A TV ad for an online holiday website featured an operating theatre where a surgeon was conducting brain surgery. The surgeon said, "Let's see what we got here" and began to operate on the patient's brain.
The patient had a laptop on his lap and as the surgeon poked around the patient's brain, he lifted his hands and began to type on the laptop. A nurse then said to the surgeon, "This is completely unethical" to which he replied, "My hours are unethical; I don't have time to sit around searching tonnes of travel sites looking for flights and hotels." The nurse replied, "Just use Kayak. It compares hundreds of travel sites in seconds" and the surgeon replied sarcastically, "Well, I guess you're the brains of this operation". The surgeon then moved the patient's arms as if he were punching the nurse; he then lifted the patient's arm and high-fived him. A voice-over stated, "Go to Kayak.co.uk and you could save up to 20% on your next flight. Kayak. Search one and done."
The ad was cleared by Clearcast with no timing restriction.
Issue
The ASA received 441 complaints.
1. A number of complainants challenged whether the theme of the ad was offensive.
2. Some complainants, which included people who either themselves or had family members who were about to undergo or had undergone brain surgery and people who had lost family members to brain tumours and other neurological conditions, challenged whether the ad was distressing and deeply upsetting.
3. Twenty-five complainants, who were concerned that the ad could be distressing to children, challenged whether it was appropriate for broadcast during the day when children might be watching.
4. Sixteen complainants challenged whether the ad was offensive because it was insulting to surgeons and the medical profession in general.
Response
1.2., 3. & 4.
Kayak said they chose humour in their ads for a number of reasons and acknowledged that humour could offend at times. They said they tested their advertising for clarity, entertainment value and acceptability but they did not see any abnormal research findings for the ad.
Kayak believed the ad was so obviously a parody that it was not offensive. It portrayed a situation that was completely absurd in an attempt to make a point about the misguided lengths to find travel deals when, instead, they could have contacted Kayak. They said it neither intended to portray real-life drama nor to prey on fear or anxiety. They said the response they had to the ad was overwhelmingly positive including positive comments from those who had undergone brain surgery.
Kayak said although the ad was aired during times when children might be watching television, they did not target children nor did they believe that the ad ran during any children's programming.
Clearcast agreed with Kayak's comments. They felt the ad was a very obvious parody and was much too far removed from real life to cause widespread offence. They said the ad was not intended to portray a real life event and that instead, it portrayed a completely absurd and exaggerated situation. For those reasons, they did not apply a timing restriction.
Assessment
1. Not Upheld
The ASA noted the ad depicted the surgeon's desperation at having insufficient time to search for his holiday and that he was prepared to behave in an unethical manner to find his holiday, which both he and the nurse appeared to acknowledge was inappropriate. We understood that some viewers may have found the depiction of an operation unpleasant and the idea of a surgeon manipulating a patient in that way distasteful. However, we considered that most viewers were likely to understand that it was a farcical situation which was not intended to reflect or depict real life. We therefore concluded that the ad was unlikely to cause widespread offence.
On this point, we investigated the ad under BCAP Code rule 4.2 4.2 Advertisements must not cause serious or widespread offence against generally accepted moral, social or cultural standards. (Harm and Offence) but did not find it in breach.
2. Upheld
Although the ad was an unrealistic portrayal of what happened during an operation, we considered that for those viewers who had either personally experienced brain surgery, had family members who had undergone or were about to undergo that type of surgery the theme was likely to provoke a strong reaction.
The surgeon appeared to be taking advantage of a patient's immobility, while undergoing a serious major operation, by using him to search for a holiday. We considered the ad's treatment of a serious and delicate medical procedure could be seen as flippant, and as such, the theme of the ad was likely to be difficult to watch for those viewers who had been affected by brain surgery in some way. Although we understood the ad was intended to be a humorous depiction of someone pressed for time searching for a holiday, we noted a number of complainants had found it distressing and some had found it sickening and deeply offensive because of their personal experience. We considered the ad's flippant treatment of a serious and recognisably real situation was likely to cause distress and serious offence to those viewers who had been affected by the type of operation depicted in the ad. We considered the ad was likely to cause distress without justifiable reason and serious offence to some viewers and therefore concluded it breached the Code.
On this point, the ad breached BCAP Code rules 4.2 4.2 Advertisements must not cause serious or widespread offence against generally accepted moral, social or cultural standards. and 4.10 4.10 Advertisements must not distress the audience without justifiable reason. Advertisements must not exploit the audience's fears or superstitions (Harm and Offence).
3. Not Upheld
Clearcast did not apply a scheduling restriction which meant the ad could be shown at any time, including children's programmes; some complainants reported seeing the ad during the children's programme, "Peppa Pig". We considered, however, that younger children were unlikely to understand the scenario or that the surgeon was using a helpless patient to search the internet for cheap holidays. While the scene where the surgeon inserted the probes into the patient's brain was found unpleasant by some older viewers, we considered that it was unlikely to cause distress to younger children. We also considered that while it was possible that older children might understand the intended comic effect of the scenario, they were unlikely to interpret the ad as being a realistic scenario of what happened during a surgical operation. We therefore concluded that the ad was unlikely to cause harm to those children who saw the ad and was not inappropriately scheduled.
On this point, we investigated the ad under BCAP Code rules
4.1
4.1
Advertisements must contain nothing that could cause physical, mental, moral or social harm to persons under the age of 18.
(Harm and Offence),
5.1
5.1
Advertisements that are suitable for older children but could distress younger children must be sensitively scheduled (see Section 32: Scheduling).
(Children) and
32.3
32.3
Relevant timing restrictions must be applied to advertisements that, through their content, might harm or distress children of particular ages or that are otherwise unsuitable for them.
(Scheduling) but did not find it in breach.
4. Not Upheld
We noted the viewers' concerns that the scenario was insulting to surgeons and the medical profession generally. However, the nurse told the surgeon that his behaviour, was unethical, which the surgeon appeared to acknowledge. We considered viewers would understand the comic intention and that it was not a realistic portrayal of an operation and was unlikely to damage the reputation of doctors or the medical profession.
On this point, we investigated the ad under BCAP Code rule 4.2 4.2 Advertisements must not cause serious or widespread offence against generally accepted moral, social or cultural standards. (Harm and Offence) but did not find it in breach.
Action
The ad must no longer be broadcast in its present form.
